From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 13 03:08:43 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E24CF84; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:08:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@amdmi3.ru) Received: from smtp.timeweb.ru (smtp.timeweb.ru [92.53.116.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 211EA6F3; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:08:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [213.148.20.85] (helo=hive.panopticon) by smtp.timeweb.ru with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_CAMELLIA_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1U5RzE-0008Gf-94; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:22:16 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.32]) by hive.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id C41A8B84D; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:22:15 +0400 (MSK) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B18A8D9; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:22:15 +0400 (MSK) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:22:15 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Kimmo Paasiala Subject: Re: CLANG and -fstack-protector Message-ID: <20130213022215.GK99263@hades.panopticon> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: FreeBSD current , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 03:08:43 -0000 * Kimmo Paasiala (kpaasial@gmail.com) wrote: > Does the -fstack-protector option work on CLANG 3.1 and 3.2? > > There is thread on FreeBSD forums about the stack protector and ports > and I'm wondering if it's possible to use the -fstack-protector option > with CLANG. > > http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=36927 You might be interested in this patch: https://github.com/AMDmi3/freebsd-ports-mk/compare/master...stack-protector afaik, in prior discussion some years ago an issue was mentioned that some ports don't build with stack-protector, so I suggested to introduce STACK_PROTECTOR_SAFE/_UNSAFE knobs similar to what we have for MAKE_JOBS_SAFE_/_UNSAFE (we might actually only need STACK_PROTECTOR_UNSAFE, as unlike MAKE_JOBS, build errors caused by enabling stack protector are not transient, so we can have an exp-run to just mark all uncompatible ports and consider all others compatible). If there's interest in this, I can refresh the patch and submit it. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru